UGHH!! Why didn't they include this?! This is just bad storytelling.
First of all, in the movie, when this character DID eventually show up, I had no idea who he was, or how he knew about Mel Gibson's character. Second, it's like 20 SECONDS LONG, so it's not like it's going to extend the movie that long!!!
@ScarlettOcean92 They really fucked up on scripting this movie... they aimed to be PC and cut out parts that defamed the British too much or this contextualizing piece which explains the guy's later line about him being a ghost.
@patriotofliberty1776 -Well the thing is much of the story is BS as the real historic character of Tavington was sent home to Britain for attacking a prisoner quite smartish as contrary to American movie making the British forces had standards even then. As for your comment of cutting out the parts that defamed the British too much is wrong as the parts deleted make sure the British are de-humanised into SS type characters but that is usual with Xenophobic Mel Gibson's film
@Fartsurmonde The war was as violent as this depiction made it out to be in some places... there were bodies floating down rivers at times, and massacres of civilians. It checkered by gentleman like Cornwallis who afforded mercy to civilians and enemy combatants
@patriotofliberty1776 -Well I was just pointing out that the Tavington story for the movie was used and greatly exaggerated from reality. The stories of civilian massacres was greatly exaggerated in real life too for Washington's purposes. In fact there is evidence the "massacres" that took place were by rebels to try and intimidate loyalists to the British Crown.
@Fartsurmonde Tory loyalists did get massacred at times, but you're trivializing what the British did. Both sides had their excesses and in some parts of the country it was a gentleman's war following the protocols of chivalrous 18th century armies.
@patriotofliberty1776 -Tory loyalists!-hardly,many were just simple farmers who were having their lands stolen for not supporting the rebellion.True there were excesses on both sides but the British troops were controlled by a certain amount of rules of engagement -the rebels were not as they were acting a "guerilla warfare" in modern term, which included intimidation of the populace & were on the whole a law unto themselves warfare conduct control was patchy until later.
Comment removed
JetyWawoo101 2 months ago in playlist More videos from EverythingHistoryUSA
What is this movie rated? i heard it wuz R
LoveMitchelMusso92 3 months ago
He didn't die, he is the only guy to survive. He tells the commanding officer that he saw only one man, not even a man a ghost.
cotten9 4 months ago
That would have been awesome if he let out a sadistic Joker laugh just before he died.
Minacious 4 months ago
@Minacious He didn't die, he was wounded and Tavington asks him what he saw
woo1693 4 months ago
if you lisen to the words said , he says how did 20 of his majesty's soldiers die? so its obievoius that he was a survivor
KingsofSparta 5 months ago
was the wounded redcoat the private that tavington was questioning
toughtony0914 8 months ago
Really... WHERE IS THE FRICKIN EDITOR?!
TheArmyTrombone 8 months ago
UGHH!! Why didn't they include this?! This is just bad storytelling.
First of all, in the movie, when this character DID eventually show up, I had no idea who he was, or how he knew about Mel Gibson's character. Second, it's like 20 SECONDS LONG, so it's not like it's going to extend the movie that long!!!
ScarlettOcean92 1 year ago 24
@ScarlettOcean92 it is in the movie but the extended edition on blue ray.
WorldFrontlineMedia 1 year ago
@ScarlettOcean92 They really fucked up on scripting this movie... they aimed to be PC and cut out parts that defamed the British too much or this contextualizing piece which explains the guy's later line about him being a ghost.
patriotofliberty1776 2 months ago
@patriotofliberty1776 -Well the thing is much of the story is BS as the real historic character of Tavington was sent home to Britain for attacking a prisoner quite smartish as contrary to American movie making the British forces had standards even then. As for your comment of cutting out the parts that defamed the British too much is wrong as the parts deleted make sure the British are de-humanised into SS type characters but that is usual with Xenophobic Mel Gibson's film
Fartsurmonde 2 months ago
@Fartsurmonde The war was as violent as this depiction made it out to be in some places... there were bodies floating down rivers at times, and massacres of civilians. It checkered by gentleman like Cornwallis who afforded mercy to civilians and enemy combatants
patriotofliberty1776 2 months ago
@patriotofliberty1776 -Well I was just pointing out that the Tavington story for the movie was used and greatly exaggerated from reality. The stories of civilian massacres was greatly exaggerated in real life too for Washington's purposes. In fact there is evidence the "massacres" that took place were by rebels to try and intimidate loyalists to the British Crown.
Fartsurmonde 2 months ago
@Fartsurmonde Tory loyalists did get massacred at times, but you're trivializing what the British did. Both sides had their excesses and in some parts of the country it was a gentleman's war following the protocols of chivalrous 18th century armies.
patriotofliberty1776 2 months ago
@patriotofliberty1776 -Tory loyalists!-hardly,many were just simple farmers who were having their lands stolen for not supporting the rebellion.True there were excesses on both sides but the British troops were controlled by a certain amount of rules of engagement -the rebels were not as they were acting a "guerilla warfare" in modern term, which included intimidation of the populace & were on the whole a law unto themselves warfare conduct control was patchy until later.
Fartsurmonde 2 months ago
THAT EXPLAINS HOW THAT GUY SAW MEL GIBSONS CHARACTER.
BaritoneB27 1 year ago 12